ATI says the 'catalyst 3.8 monitor damage' scare is bogus

[J.Clarke]

Display Properties > Settings > Advanced > Adapter.

What OS are you running? Under 2K and XP the only things appearing on
that tab are "properties" and "list all modes". No "optimal" and no
"adapter defaults".

My take on this - after reading opinions here, it seemed likely that
the refresh problem was so much BS; I installed the Cat 3.8 drivers,
my refresh rate is, as usual set to "Optimal" and my refresh rate
remains the same as it always was. This is on W98SE, and I checked
the rate on the monitor - no problems whatsoever, but 2D is even
better than it was before.

FWIW, one time I had a classroom full of students _try_ to break a
monitor (was 20 years old and going to be trashed by the Powers That
Be at the end of the semester, so may as well learn something) by
playing with the video board and the drivers and they couldn't do it.
And I'm not talking about kids here--one of the students in that class
was running a mainframe shop with something like 10,000 users online,
another had been fixing radars for 40 years, 20 in the RAF and 20 more
as a civilian consultant, two of them were Russian electrical engineers
(that was a _good_ class--I learned as much as they did). If_they_
couldn't break the thing then while I won't say categorically that it
can't be done, I will say that it's not_easy_.

 

[patrickp]

So where, exactly, does one set these "optimal or adapter defaults"
using the ATI drivers?

--

Display Properties > Settings > Advanced > Adapter.

My take on this - after reading opinions here, it seemed likely that the
refresh problem was so much BS; I installed the Cat 3.8 drivers, my refresh
rate is, as usual set to "Optimal" and my refresh rate remains the same as
it always was. This is on W98SE, and I checked the rate on the monitor - no
problems whatsoever, but 2D is even better than it was before.

patrickp

 

[J.Clarke]

FWIW, one time I had a classroom full of students _try_ to break a
monitor (was 20 years old and going to be trashed by the Powers That
Be at the end of the semester, so may as well learn something) by
playing with the video board and the drivers and they couldn't do
it.

In the ol' DOS days there were various utilities that let you play
with the video timings, creating some *very* strange display modes.
Anyway, having more curiosity than sense I set the horizontal timings
so the display period ended before it started. There was a "zap" and
the video disappeared into a fading white dot in the middle of the
screen. Fortunately the display was restored after rebooting and
powercycling the monitor, but can well imagine some old monitor
without built-in safety mechanisms taking permanent damage of some
sort.[/QUOTE]

Where the whole issue got started, with PCs anyway, was with the IBM
monochrome display and the Hercules board--the board came with a warning
that particular settings could damage that monitor.

Since then monitors have come a long way--I was quite surprised one time
to plug a autosynch color display into one of those old monochrome
boards and have it work fine--IBM never made a color display that would
work with them.

 

[Ben Pope]

Ding, ding ding, we finally have someone who knows more about this
than the peanut gallery above.

Hehe, I've not really been following the related hread/articles.

I still don't think ATI can be hold responsible, even if the alleged is
true.

I think it's up to the manufacturers of the monitors to protect against
incorrect refresh rates.

Of course... ATI will claim that monitors should be protected and the
monitor manufactureres will claim that you have used it outside of spec...

Ben

 

[ammonton]

FWIW, one time I had a classroom full of students _try_ to break a
monitor (was 20 years old and going to be trashed by the Powers That
Be at the end of the semester, so may as well learn something) by
playing with the video board and the drivers and they couldn't do it.

In the ol' DOS days there were various utilities that let you play with
the video timings, creating some *very* strange display modes. Anyway,
having more curiosity than sense I set the horizontal timings so the
display period ended before it started. There was a "zap" and the video
disappeared into a fading white dot in the middle of the screen.
Fortunately the display was restored after rebooting and powercycling
the monitor, but can well imagine some old monitor without built-in
safety mechanisms taking permanent damage of some sort.

-a

 

[J.Clarke]

Here is exactly what I read at www.simhq.com.

NOT FROM ME:

UPDATE: Monitor Death Issue From Catalyst 3.8 Software:

I've got more information regarding the "Monitor Death" problem with
the ATI Catalyst 3.8 driver series:

Known Cards Affected:
All Radeon 9800 XT's
All Radeon 9800 Pro's
All Radeon 9800 Non-Pro's

Possible Cards Affected:
All Radeon 9700 Pro's
All Radeon 9700 Non-Pro's

It seems like the new driver series is attempting to pass way too many
unsupported resolution/refresh rates to the monitor, overloading the
monitor's relay system and frying the monitor. Instead of reading the
refresh rates from the PRIMARY display INF files, it is reading the
SECONDARY display INF refresh rates. For those of us with only 1
monitor hooked up, there is no SECONDARY display INF refresh rate
file, so the video card starts at its own highest supported refresh
rate and starts passing that onto the monitor. With Radeon 9800/9700's
capable of syncing @ a refresh rate of up to 200 Hz, that means 99% of
the world's monitors are at risk of damage.

This is at variance with the mechanism of operation that ATI
claims--they say that the inf files are not referenced at all by their
drivers. But of course whoever posted this knows more about ATI's
software than do the people who wrote it.

So far, a total of 183 monitors, ranging from high-end 22" Viewsonic
P225F's to lowly 14" Compaq SVGA monitors have been reported as
dead/damaged in what is believed to be due to this problem. It is to
be taken seriously.

You see, this is the basic problem. To whom have these 183 monitors
been reported? To ATI? They claim otherwise. To you personally?
Please provide the reports. To someone else? Who might that be?

I am hereby reporting that 200,000 monitors blew up killing their users
the instant they were connected to nvidia boards. There, it has been
reported. Want me to make up some bullshit about why it happened?

The simple fact that somebody claims that something "has been reported"
doesn't make it so, now, does it?

I'll attest to this problem, as my Dell UltraScan P1110 21" Trinitron
has been damaged due to this problem. Running the Catalyst 3.8's on my
Corona system @ 1600x1200 @ 85 Hz and playing Unreal Tournament 2003,
I exited the game and the monitor started flickering like mad,
attempting to change refresh rates. After 8 unsuccessful retries, the
monitor displayed the "NO VIDEO SIGNAL FROM INPUT 1" message and the
power light turned orange. A burning smell was coming from the back of
the monitor. Hooking the monitor up to another system proved useless,
as it did not start up.

And of course it is necessarily the drivers and not simply that the
monitor picked that time to die? Funny that ATI seems to be unaware
that Dell has reported your monitor to them, or perhaps Dell has not
done so because they found another cause of failure?

Fortunately, I still have a few weeks left on the warranty, so I got
to exchange for a new one, but the fact of the matter is that even if
you have a high-end monitor, you aren't safe from this problem.

Dell doesn't _have_ a "high end monitor".

A whole bunch more individuals have noticed the same problem, but are
running monitors that have some type of refresh-rate detection system
that will only change the monitors refresh-rate/resolution if it is
supported by the hardware. Those users are protected from this
"monitor death" problem.

And those individuals are? They reported this where?

At this time, the Dell leaked 3.9 drivers do NOT fix this problem.
Neither do the Omega 3.9 leaked drivers.

The only way for you to save your monitor is to revert BACK to the
Catalyst 3.7 (or previous generation) drivers. Links to these drivers
are available on the first post of this thread.

Funny, none of my monitors seem to be aware that they are in danger.

_____________________________________________________________________
________

And we have this from OC (http://www.overclockers.com/tips00479/). You
think they are some sort of Nvidia plant too?

In point of fact yes, they may well be, since that post is the only one
that anybody has pointed to that gives any information about the
problem, and the post is very vague.

 

[Gonzo]

No dipshit, the .inf file ATI is using set the timing way to high. You
never use the optimal or adapter defaults? Vid drivers are supposed to
read the monitor .inf file but it looks like ATI drivers don't. Do
some research dork.

Put your tin foil hat back on and watch for black ATi helicopters asswipe.

Even better, buy yourself an LCD LOL!

 

[Gonzo]

How would you know that? You an ATI insider? Nope, you're just a pussy
fanboi from way back.

You can type, but do you know how to ****ing read? Can you say "Reading
Comprehension"??

Keep up with me here OK?!?

 

[Horace Halfbottom]

I'd like to see you tell us where you got that from.

Mike

In the forums at www.simhq.com

And I have already read the reports, and for Gonzo, I already own an LCD so
this issue can not affect me anyway. But many CRT monitors are not so it is
possible that drivers forcing too high of a refresh rate can damage them.

Maybe it's FUD afterall, but maybe it's not too, and I know Gonzo is a
*big* ATI fanboi and can't be trusted because he is biased.

 

[Horace Halfbottom]

I'd like to see you tell us where you got that from.

Mike

Here is exactly what I read at www.simhq.com.

NOT FROM ME:

UPDATE: Monitor Death Issue From Catalyst 3.8 Software:

I've got more information regarding the "Monitor Death" problem with the ATI
Catalyst 3.8 driver series:

Known Cards Affected:
All Radeon 9800 XT's
All Radeon 9800 Pro's
All Radeon 9800 Non-Pro's

Possible Cards Affected:
All Radeon 9700 Pro's
All Radeon 9700 Non-Pro's

It seems like the new driver series is attempting to pass way too many
unsupported resolution/refresh rates to the monitor, overloading the
monitor's relay system and frying the monitor. Instead of reading the
refresh rates from the PRIMARY display INF files, it is reading the
SECONDARY display INF refresh rates. For those of us with only 1 monitor
hooked up, there is no SECONDARY display INF refresh rate file, so the
video card starts at its own highest supported refresh rate and starts
passing that onto the monitor. With Radeon 9800/9700's capable of syncing @
a refresh rate of up to 200 Hz, that means 99% of the world's monitors are
at risk of damage.

So far, a total of 183 monitors, ranging from high-end 22" Viewsonic P225F's
to lowly 14" Compaq SVGA monitors have been reported as dead/damaged in
what is believed to be due to this problem. It is to be taken seriously.

I'll attest to this problem, as my Dell UltraScan P1110 21" Trinitron has
been damaged due to this problem. Running the Catalyst 3.8's on my Corona
system @ 1600x1200 @ 85 Hz and playing Unreal Tournament 2003, I exited the
game and the monitor started flickering like mad, attempting to change
refresh rates. After 8 unsuccessful retries, the monitor displayed the "NO
VIDEO SIGNAL FROM INPUT 1" message and the power light turned orange. A
burning smell was coming from the back of the monitor. Hooking the monitor
up to another system proved useless, as it did not start up.

Fortunately, I still have a few weeks left on the warranty, so I got to
exchange for a new one, but the fact of the matter is that even if you have
a high-end monitor, you aren't safe from this problem.

A whole bunch more individuals have noticed the same problem, but are
running monitors that have some type of refresh-rate detection system that
will only change the monitors refresh-rate/resolution if it is supported by
the hardware. Those users are protected from this "monitor death" problem.

At this time, the Dell leaked 3.9 drivers do NOT fix this problem. Neither
do the Omega 3.9 leaked drivers.

The only way for you to save your monitor is to revert BACK to the Catalyst
3.7 (or previous generation) drivers. Links to these drivers are available
on the first post of this thread.


_____________________________________________________________________________

And we have this from OC (http://www.overclockers.com/tips00479/). You think
they are some sort of Nvidia plant too?

 

[Horace Halfbottom]

J.Clarke wrote:

The simple fact that somebody claims that something "has been reported"
doesn't make it so, now, does it?

It doesn't make it not true either unless you can provide proof otherwise.
It works both ways fool. The smart cookie errs on the side of caution. The
3.8 drivers break a number of games too so at this point in time I see
absolutely no benefit to using them. Do you?

 

[Horace Halfbottom]

J.Clarke wrote:

In point of fact yes, they may well be, since that post is the only one
that anybody has pointed to that gives any information about the
problem, and the post is very vague.

Oh boy, OC are just a group of computer enthusiasts and have no vested
interest in damaging ATI. They even said that this story may not be
factually proven yet but to err on the side of caution until it is properly
investigated. You, on the other hand, I have my suspicions about.

 

[JAD]

agreed but in defense the first ten posts said nothing of

'They even said that this story may not be
factually proven yet but to err on the side of caution until it is properly
investigated

It was the usual 'freaking out', 'up to late to think rationally' posts

 

[J.Clarke]

J.Clarke wrote:



It doesn't make it not true either unless you can provide proof
otherwise. It works both ways fool.

No, Mr. T, it does not. You assert that something is true it is up to
you to support it. In general it is not possible to prove a negative,
therefore demanding that one do so undermines your argument.

However, since the gist of your argument seems to be that anyone who
disagrees with you is a fool, that pretty well tells us how much support
you have for it.

The smart cookie errs on the side
of caution. The 3.8 drivers break a number of games too so at this
point in time I see absolutely no benefit to using them. Do you?

Yeah, they support the new MMC.

 

[J.Clarke]

J.Clarke wrote:



Oh boy, OC are just a group of computer enthusiasts and have no vested
interest in damaging ATI.

I see. And the statement you posted was a consensus statement by all
participants?

They even said that this story may not be
factually proven

Read that very carefully.

yet but to err on the side of caution until it is
properly investigated. You, on the other hand, I have my suspicions
about.

Suspect anything you want. Personally I don't really care what someone
who admits to being half-assed thinks.

 

[Bill]

It doesn't make it not true either unless you can provide proof otherwise.
It works both ways fool. The smart cookie errs on the side of caution. The
3.8 drivers break a number of games too so at this point in time I see
absolutely no benefit to using them. Do you?

And your blathering doesn't make it true. 3.8s are working just fine
here.

Bill

 

[Roj]

It doesn't make it not true either unless you can provide proof otherwise.

Let's just say that the onus is on the one making the claim to prove
it and NOT the other way around. Basically it's a case of put up or
shut up.

 

[J.Clarke]

I've put up my evidence and I've seen none to prove it is not true.

It's not possible to prove a negative. It's up to you to prove that it
_is_ true, not up to us to prove that it isn't.

All that's been posted to refute it is some damage control put out by
ATI.

Which "damage control" is somewhat more credible than your claims, as
one would expect ATI to be aware of any complaints that ATI has
recieved, while your source doesn't say who complained or to whom so we
have no way of knowing if (a) that entity is credible and (b) how likely
it is that they would receive complaints about ATI products.

But I have already admitted that it may not be true, I just don't
follow the pied piper like these other children do. I'll wait for a
better set of drivers before I dump 3.7. I did try 3.8 briefly and
they are not very good. That is the general consensus around the
internet except in here where it is populated by fanboi fools like
Gonzo. I know Gonzo from way back and he will buy any video card so
long as it is not a Nvidia video card. Ask him about how wonderful his
KyroII is.

And now you try the ad hominem fallacy--"Gonzo" whoever he may be
doesn't like nvidia therefore anything anybody says that favors ATI must
be biased.

 

[Replicant]

Let's just say that the onus is on the one making the claim to prove
it and NOT the other way around. Basically it's a case of put up or
shut up.

I've put up my evidence and I've seen none to prove it is not true.
All that's been posted to refute it is some damage control put out by
ATI. But I have already admitted that it may not be true, I just don't
follow the pied piper like these other children do. I'll wait for a
better set of drivers before I dump 3.7. I did try 3.8 briefly and
they are not very good. That is the general consensus around the
internet except in here where it is populated by fanboi fools like
Gonzo. I know Gonzo from way back and he will buy any video card so
long as it is not a Nvidia video card. Ask him about how wonderful his
KyroII is.

 

[J.Clarke]

Yep, and that's because I've seen Gonzo lieing out of his arse saying
even the R8500 had better drivers than Nvidia's.

Since I have no idea who or what "Gonzo" might be other than a Muppet I
find his/her/its opinion a matter of crashing indifference and suggest
that you take up your disagreement with that entity instead of boring
the rest of us with it.

I owned an R8500 and
also GF2/3/4 so know that statement is BS and Gonzo is not to be
trusted due to his biased opinions. Right now I own a GF4 and 9800pro,
I think that qualifies me to be objective.

Nope. What you own has no impact on your objectivity. That is a
function of what you _believe_.

And it' not for me to prove
anything. It is for me to make an informed decision about the CAT 3.8
drivers though. You do as you see fit. Just don't BS me with this is
some sort of Nvida conspiracy, I don't buy it.

Fine, don't. Do whatever you want to, but if you want others to believe
you you have to present more evidence than you have so far.